M/S. BABYLON TRADING & INVESTMENT PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 9(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 991/KOL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 January 2018AY 2012-134 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal noted that the assessee wished to withdraw the appeal and the revenue had no objection. Consequently, the tribunal dismissed the appeal as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT against an order passed by the CIT(A) under section 263. At the time of hearing, the assessee's representative informed the tribunal that they intended to withdraw the appeal.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the assessee's request to withdraw the appeal filed against the CIT(A)'s order under section 263.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH : KOLKATA

Before: Hon’ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, JM & Hon’ble Shri Waseem Ahmed, AM ]

Hearing: 16.01.2018Pronounced: 16.01.2018

For the Appellant : Parnashree Banerjee, Advocate For the Respondent : Md. Usman, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 16.01.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 16.01.2018 ORDER Per Waseem Ahmed, AM:

1.

This appeal by the assessee arises out of the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Kolkata [in short the ld CITA] dated 20.03.2017 passed against the orders passed by the I.T.O.,Ward-9(2), Kolkata [in short the ld. AO] under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) dated 29.09.2014 for the assessment year 2012-13.

2.The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:

1. For that the order of the Ld. Pr. CIT is arbitrary, illegal and bad in law.

2. For that the order of the Ld. Pr. CIT is barred by limitation. 3.For that the Ld. Pr. CIT erred in not considering the submissions made in response to notice u/s 263 even though the same was received by the Ld. Pr. CIT.

M/s Babylon Trading & Investment Pvt. Ltd. A.Yr.2012-13 4. For that the Ld. Pr. CIT erred in invoking the provisions of section 263 when the AO applied his mind and completed the assessment after making enquiries in accordance with law.

5.

For the on the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. Pr. CIT erred in passing the order u/s 263 when the order was not erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue.

6.

For that on the facts and circumstances of the case the order of the Pr.CIT be modified and the assessee be given the relief prayed for.

7.

For that the assessee craves leave to add, alter or amend any ground before or at the time of hearing.

3.

At the outset, the ld. AR for the assessee submitted that he has been instructed to withdraw the appeal filed before the Hon’ble ITAT. In this regard the Ld. AR has filed an withdrawal application vide dated 12.01.2018 which is reproduced below:

To, The Hon’ble Members, Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” Bench, 225/C, A.J.C. Bose Road, Kolkata-700020. Reg: Assessment year 2012-13 M/s Babylon Trading & Investment Pvt. Ltd. vs. I.T.O., Ward-9(2), Kolkata Hon’ble Sirs, Kindly refer to the above. An appeal against the order passed by Ld. Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, Kolkata-3, u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for a.y. 2012-13 in the case of the said appellant company has been filed before this Hon’ble Tribunal, which is now fixed for hearing before “B” Bench on 16.01.2018. I have been authorized to represent the said appeal before this Hon’ble Tribunal. Vakalatnama is enclosed herewith. I am directed to intimate that the appellant- company intend to withdraw the said appeal in and it is, therefore, humbly prayed to allow the appellant to withdraw the same and oblige. Undersigned apologizes for the inconvenience caused to the Hon’ble Tribunal.

M/s Babylon Trading & Investment Pvt. Ltd. A.Yr.2012-13 Thanking you, Yours Faithfully For, S.K. Tulsyan & Co.

On the other hand, the Ld. DR raised no objection if the appeal is withdrawn by the assessee. In view of the above, we dismiss the appeal filed by the assessee as withdrawn.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn.

Order pronounced in the Court on 16.01.2018.

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →